James Turner wrote: >> I suspect this should be a pref - either the local cockpit sounds are >> associated with the aircraft model (realistic operation) or they are >> associated with the view position (unrealistic but useful if you like >> switching to an outside view but don't want to miss a bit of ATC or an >> alert)
On 09/22/09 02:10, Erik Hofman wrote: > Why was I already suspecting it would end up like this? :) Let's discuss the realistic options first, and then see to what extent we can and/or should implement unrealistic options. 1) If you are inside the cockpit and have the NAV radio tuned up, you should be able to hear Morse code IDENT signals. Similarly if you have the Tower frequency tuned up, you should be able to hear chatter appropriate to that frequency. If you have the Approach frequency tuned up, you should hear chatter appropriate to that frequency. 2) If you are standing outside the aircraft, the engine sound will be 20 or 30 dB louder, while the radio sounds will be 20 or 30 or 40 dB quieter, i.e. completely inaudible. 3) If you are in the Tower, partaking of the "Tower View" you should hear chatter appropriate to the Tower frequency. It is verrry unlikely that Tower has any approach frequencies or navaid frequencies tuned up. If the Tower job is divided into multiple sectors, as it generally is at large busy fields, that introduces additional complexity. There are ways of dealing with this, which we can discuss later if anybody is interested. 4a) If you are in a chase plane, partaking of the "Chase View", you might hear chatter appropriate to whatever frequencies are tuned up on the chase plane's radios ... not the chased plane's radios. 4b) However, it would not be unreasonable to posit that the chase plane would have tuned up the same frequencies as the chased plane. Call it a coincidence if you wish, but not a completely unreasonable coincidence. Note that in this scenario, and indeed all of the scenarios considered here, the radio sounds do not exhibit any Doppler shift, since the observers are always stationary relative to the relevant radio receiver, even if they are not stationary relative to the aircraft we are observing. 4c) If somebody wants to flesh out the chase plane to the point where it has its own radios, distinct from the chased plane's radios, that's fine with me ... but it might be a whole lot of work for relatively little value to typical users. I reckon this should be rather low on the priority list. ================== Just saying "let it be a preference" available in "unrealistic mode" is not a panacea. For starters, there are infinitely more unrealistic behaviors than there are realistic behaviors, so deciding what to implement is sure to be hard, and then implementing it is likely to be hard also. Furthermore, it raises all sorts of user-interface issues, since it is not even obvious how the user could _express_ such preferences in any natural way. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel